Should the Narrowing Scope of Second-tier Certiorari Mandate Findings of Fact in Local Government Quasi-judicial Decisions?

The Florida Supreme Court is looking at the rules for how lower courts review decisions made by local governments. Right now, they can only check if the law was followed, not if the decision was right. The Supreme Court may change the rules to make local governments write down their reasons for decisions. This would make it easier for the courts to check if the decisions were fair. In recent decisions, the Florida Supreme Court clarified the rules for second-tier certiorari review. They said that a district court can only review whether the circuit court followed the correct procedures and applied the right laws. They also said that the district court can’t just disagree with the circuit court’s interpretation of the law. The Supreme Court also explained that the district court can only overturn a decision if there is an obvious error, like the circuit court reweighing evidence. The Supreme Court agreed with the district court’s decision because it found that the circuit court had made a mistake by reweighing the evidence. The Florida Supreme Court recently emphasized that second-tier review of court decisions is only used in special cases, not for every legal error. In a recent case, the court said that agencies should make written findings of fact when making decisions. The court also criticized a lower court for substituting its judgment for the county commission’s decision and for not making written findings. This requirement for written findings would apply to any important decision made by a government agency. Justice Pariente argued that there should be a requirement for written findings of fact in zoning decisions, to prevent arbitrary and inconsistent decision-making. She believed that without this requirement, too much power is given to the circuit court, which can lead to limited review and potential legal issues. She also referenced an article and a previous court case to support her argument for stricter scrutiny of zoning decisions. Justice Pariente believes that quasi-judicial boards should provide written findings to assist in appellate review, and that due process in these hearings mandates written findings. Some jurisdictions agree, while others have ruled that local governments should give reasons for their decisions without specifying whether they must be written. On the other hand, Justice Wells disagrees, saying that not all decisions require written statements and that imposing such a requirement would be cumbersome and promote litigation. He also pointed out that local zoning authorities often have numerous matters to deal with and may not have the resources to provide written findings for each decision. Local zoning authorities have a hard time reaching agreement on the facts of a case. This is because different board members focus on different aspects of the case. Additionally, the composition of the board may change from meeting to meeting, which makes it difficult to reach a decision. This means that written findings are impractical for local zoning authorities. Instead, the circuit courts should review the record to determine if there was enough evidence to support the local government’s decision. If the circuit court overlooks evidence that supports the local government’s decision, their decision should be reversed. Requiring written reasons for land use decisions could be really hard for local governments and people in the community. But if it’s required, the board should at least have to say why they made their decision, either in their meeting notes or in a recording. They could just refer to a recommendation from a professional department. If the board doesn’t explain their decision, a court might have to look at the case to figure out if there’s a good reason for the decision. If not, the decision might have to be sent back for a do-over. These are citations and references to legal cases in Florida. They discuss the requirements for making zoning decisions and whether detailed findings of fact are necessary. The cases also address the legal processes and statutes that apply to zoning decisions in the state.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/should-the-narrowing-scope-of-second-tier-certiorari-mandate-findings-of-fact-in-local-government-quasi-judicial-decisions/